GPU Buying Guide - (Read first post)

George makes a valid point; honestly, even an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 or a Vega 56 barely feels necessary for 1080p, let alone investing in an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 just for that resolution—that would be nothing more than throwing money down the drain. In my estimation, the AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB or the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB remain the most sensible choices for a 1080p/75Hz setup. There are those few titles that might actually demand an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 at 1080p/75Hz, but frankly, they aren't worth playing if that's the case, as such poor optimization would be an absolute disgrace. I simply wouldn't play them out of principle, regardless of what the game might be. This kind of trend eventually forces you to set aside $1000 just to accommodate a low-end card, and I believe we shouldn't be encouraging such inefficiency by purchasing hardware to compensate for it.

It’s basically "how much cocaine and Romanian hookers can you afford?" That's how it works. Some people are perfectly fine chilling on medium settings, while others won't even touch a game unless everything is cranked to Ultra. To some folks, 75fps is smooth sailing, but if you aren't hitting 120fps, you're basically playing a slideshow. Honestly, if an AMD Radeon RX 580 / Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 could actually run every single 1080p title at max settings on a 144Hz monitor, then maybe we could say upgrading your GPU is a waste of money. But as it stands? Whether or not it makes sense to drop a bag on a high-end card is entirely up to how much of a gearhead you are.

My perspective is this: if someone is willing to drop serious cash on hardware, they aren't looking to play on medium settings or deal with sub-60 FPS drops. You don't want to be caught off guard by poor performance. We've already reached a point where there are plenty of titles where an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB or an AMD Radeon RX 580 just won't cut it anymore. Most people buy new gear specifically so they can run the latest AAA releases, not some three-year-old game.

Final Fantasy XV
Kingdom Come: Deliverance
Grand Theft Auto V
Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Assassin's Creed Odyssey medium preset
Tomb Raider
Mafia III
Watch Dogs 2
PUBG
Hitman 2
Monster Hunter

...and so on. We are seeing several games now where even at medium presets, the minimum frame rates dip below 60 FPS on cards like the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB or the AMD Radeon RX 580. Some of these titles have been out for years, and when you factor in High, Very High, or Ultra settings, you aren't just turning down "one or two details." Sure, bad optimization is a real issue, but it's not limited to just two or three games anymore; it’s becoming a pattern. Buying something more powerful than an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB or an AMD Radeon RX 580 for 1080p 60/75Hz gaming is definitely not overkill, nor is it a waste of money.

Ideally, we would see much clearer benchmarks and criteria established for these tiers.

There are plenty of games where the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 Minimum FPS actually dips below 60.

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 still makes sense for 1080p, mostly because it won't always be total overkill, especially at 75Hz.

But looking at 1080p in general, my point isn't that games can't crush a card or that people shouldn't play new releases. It's that those tests where the FPS on an AMD Radeon RX 580 / Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 drops under 60 are usually done on max settings—and you could push that FPS back above 60 with just a few minor tweaks that most people wouldn't even notice.

Games have these ridiculous requirements on max settings because
1) reviews and trailers are shot on those settings to get that "wow" factor.
2) Nvidia and AMD sponsor these games, so obviously they want to make sure you feel the need to buy a beefier GPU.

Just dial back the AA, turn off Gameworks, tweak your textures, and in most cases, you'll be fine.

P.S., look at games like PUBG—they barely run right even on high-end rigs, and honestly, nobody's actually using ultra settings anyway.

We really need to consider the fact that more and more reviewers are testing on High settings instead of Ultra, and those who do stick to Ultra often just toggle off one or two of the most demanding settings anyway. While we don't have Medium or High benchmarks for every single title, it’s pretty obvious that if the minimum frame rate on Ultra sits around 30 or 40 FPS, dropping down to High isn't going to magically boost those minimums significantly. Similarly, if the average is 55 FPS, it means the minimums are even lower, so simply shifting to a lower preset won't necessarily stabilize them at a smooth 60 FPS. The real issue is that this has become the standard for every major AAA release lately. I’ve churned through about ten of them in no time, and the flood of these titles is only going to increase every month. Like I mentioned before, these "optimal" cards—like the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB or the AMD Radeon RX 580—can't even maintain 60 FPS on Medium in some games anymore, let alone High, which is becoming impossible for a massive amount of titles.

Maybe it's just the reviewers you follow, but I feel like most mainstream outlets are using top-tier GPUs and cranking every detail to the max.

You don't necessarily see an FPS boost just by jumping from high to medium settings; usually, it's those specific individual settings that actually move the needle more than the overall preset level.

But regardless, just because a card can't push everything at ultra settings doesn't mean it isn't still optimal. Being "optimal" was never synonymous with "everything on ultra" anyway.

Of course I'm talking about peak performance, but my point is that we shouldn't dismiss people using an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 or 1080 for 1080p gaming. What might have been considered total overkill for 99% of titles at 1080p back when they launched two and a half years ago just doesn't hold true anymore today.

👍👍

It’s high time the next generation (Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060) hits that $300 mark again, actually pushing 1080p to its limit or even handling 1440p properly.

Exactly. The performance tier of the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070/1080 really needs to drop down to the price point of the AMD Radeon RX 580 if we want to maximize 1080p gaming or even push into 1440p territory. That’s exactly what the Navi architecture should be aiming for.

Can anyone help me out? I’ve got this pretty old rig, a Lenovo ThinkCentre. It used to be a mini tower, but it's been moved into a standard case now, and it's sitting at 8GB of RAM, just so nobody gets confused about the size.
Basically, I just want to throw a cheap GPU in there so it can actually run Fortnite.
I'm not looking to drop a ton of cash on this thing since it's ancient. This is the first time anyone in the house has even asked to play something, and we aren't exactly dying to do it, but it would be cool if we could.
The problem is, right now it's totally choking because it's just running on that basic Intel integrated graphics.
So, does anyone have any suggestions on what to grab, or maybe even something to sell?

Just hunt down some old HD 6000 or 7000 series Radeon card for maybe $30 or $40 and call it a day. Problem solved.

That’s basically the plan, but I'm seriously out of the loop on all this stuff, so I have no clue how to pick anything smart. Any suggestions? I'd really appreciate it!

You can check the game's requirements right here

https://www.systemrequirementslab.co...fortnite/15349

Use this to compare graphics cards

http://hwbench.com/vgas/geforce-gt-7...-radeon-r5-230

The most important thing is checking the power draw on your card. You'll want to grab a beefier power supply if your current one can't handle it... For example, if a card like an HD 6870 pulls 150W, it would be smart to look for a 550-600W unit. Something budget-friendly like an EVGA 600W office series from $87 works, but a higher-end unit from brands like Corsair is also a solid choice...

Anything over 30fps is fine; anything under that is rough



This one would be a good pick

https://www.ebay.com/itm/graphics-card-listing-example

It doesn't need extra power connectors, but having two gigs of VRAM would be better

This one is dirt cheap, but you might need a stronger PSU since it pulls 130W

https://www.ebay.com/itm/graphics-card-listing-example

https://www.ebay.com/itm/graphics-card-listing-example

https://www.ebay.com/itm/graphics-card-listing-example

That last one is slightly more powerful for you

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 is stronger than the GTX 750 or the HD 7850. It pulls 140W and has 2GB of VRAM

I’d definitely go with the 660 Ti; you can usually snag one at a pretty decent price ($133). Honestly, I don't think it's even worth looking at cards with only 1GB of VRAM.

Sold it!

I listed two of them, maybe this one hasn't sold yet

https://www.ebay.com/itm/graphics-card-listing-example

https://www.ebay.com/itm/graphics-card-listing

Maybe just grab that one? It’ll probably rip through anything you throw at a GTX 660, and I guess it might even still have a warranty.

Man, this second-to-last one is being a total pain to nail down. I just shot a message to the last guy, so let's see what happens.

Sent from my LG-M700 via Reddit

Keith Nguyen7 said:That second-to-last one might be a tough sell. I messaged the last guy, so we'll see.

Sent from my LG-M700 using Reddit

Are you talking about this GTX 1060?

I don't know why, but whenever I see someone post an ad for hardware and include "all paperwork included," as if they're selling a house or a purebred dog, it just feels gross.